Abu-Jamal’s lawyers given twomore weeks to file forrehearing on new trial plea

5/27/08

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuityesterday granted a two-week extension forlawyers for death row inmate Mumia AbuJamal to file a petition for a rehearing on hiseffort to get a new trial.

Abu-Jamal was convicted in 1982 of themurder of Philadelphia Police Officer DanielFaulkner and sentenced to death. In lateMarch, a three-judge panel of the Third Circuitaffirmed Abu-Jamal's conviction but vacatedthe death sentence. The court said Abu-Jamalshould be sentenced to life in prison or get achance to persuade a new Philadelphia jurythat he deserves a life sentence rather thandeath.

Defense lawyer Robert R. Bryan of SanFrancisco intends to seek a rehearing beforethe court on his contention that Abu-Jamaldeserves a new trial, or at least a hearing onhis argument that some blacks wereintentionally excluded from his jury.

The court said the new filing deadline is June10. Inquirer Staff

=================Efficiently and MethodicallyFramed--Mumia is innocent!

That is the conclusion of a new book on thecase of former Black Panther, andinternationally-known political prisoner, MumiaAbu-Jamal, who has now spent over a quarterof a century on death row for a crime he didn'tcommit. The book is, THE FRAMING OFMUMIA ABU-JAMAL, by J Patrick O'Connor(Lawrence Hill Books 2008). The author is aformer UPI reporter who took an interest inMumia's case. He is now the editor of CrimeMagazine (www.crimemagazine.com).

O'Connor offers a fresh perspective, anddelivers a clear and convincing breakdown onperhaps the most notorious frame-up sinceSacco and Vanzetti. This is a case not just ofpolice corruption, or a racist lynching, thoughit is both. The courts are in this just as deepas the cops, and it reaches to the top of theequally corrupt political system.

"This book is the first to convincingly show howthe Philadelphia Police Department andDistrict Attorney's Office efficiently andmethodically framed [Mumia Abu-Jamal]."(from the book jacket)

The Labor Action Committee To Free MumiaAbu-Jamal (LAC) wants to alert you to thisimportant new work. THE FRAMING OFMUMIA ABU-JAMAL is in bookstores now, at$16.95. but a little research in the SF BayArea suggests that it may be hard to find.Contact the Labor Action Committee if youcan't find it. We have a limited numberordered from the publisher at a discount.

Author J Patrick O'Connor says Mumia wasframed at the hands of corrupt cops andcourts, who were bent on vengeance againstone of their most prominent critics.

"What makes getting to the truth of this caseso difficult is that the prosecution built its caseon perjured testimony with a calculateddisregard for what the actual evidenceestablished," says O'Connor (p. xii).

THE FRAMING OF MUMIA ABU-JAMAL isbased on a thorough analysis of the 1982 trialand the 1995-97 appeals hearings, as well asprevious writings on this case, and researchon the MOVE organization, with which Mumiaidentifies, and the history of racist policebrutality in Philadelphia. While leaving someof the evidence of Mumia's innocenceunconsidered or disregarded, this booknevertheless makes clear that there is averitable mountain of evidence--most of itdeliberately squashed by the courts--thatshows that Mumia was blatantly anddeliberately framed, that he is innocent, thatsomebody else did the crime, and that corruptcops and courts have "fixed" this case againstMumia from the beginning.

SF BAY AREA: A book tour by the author is inplanning stages. For more information, sendyour request to: LACFreeMumia@aol.com

For an interview with the author and othermaterial about this book, visit Journalists ForMumia, www.Abu-Jamal-News.com. Thepublisher is Chicago Review Press. Get yourlocal bookstore or library to order a copy!

What we are seeing in the midst of America's financial crisis, is a crisis not so much of confidence as it is of ideology, for the crisis has its origins in an economic outlook that has been ascendant for generations. I speak of the idea of deregulation, championed by former President Ronald Reagan, who became symbolic of the shrink-government movement. His reign marked the coming of age of the so-called conservative movement, built on principles (ostensibly, at least) of reductions in government, expansion of 'free' markets, lower taxes, and strengthened nationalism, usually by military means. Although this has been primarily a Republican agenda, Democrats, like neo liberal President Bill Clinton, have hewn closely to this formula -- hence his claim to be a "new" kind of liberal. At the heart of this philosophy has been trust in 'the blind hand of the market', with a distaste for the heavy hand of regulation. As such, both of these relatively recent incarnations of political parties have had a deregulation bent, and depended on the market to set the economic beat of the nation. This has necessitated the rise of a kind of political deception, explained by scholar and Critical Resistance activist Ruth W. Gilmore as "anti-state actors." In the 2007 book, The Revolution Will Not Be Funded: Beyond the Non-Profit Industrial Complex (Cambridge, MA: South End Press), Gilmore notes: Strangely, then, we are faced with the ascendance of anti-state state actors: people and parties who gain state power by denouncing state power. Once they have achieved an elected or appointed position in government they have to make what they do seem transparently legitimate, and if budgets are any indication, they spend a lot of money even as they claim they're "shrinking government." Prison, policing, courts, and the military enjoy such legitimacy, and nowadays it seems to many observers as though there was never a time things were different. {p.43} Years of governance by these "anti-state state actors" has seen the growth and expansion of government by leaps and bounds. The prison-industrial-complex is now the largest on earth; while the military has been engaged in dubious occupations which closely resembles security services for the oil industries. And the market is about as 'free' as the U.S. was during slavery. As deregulation crumbles the state emerges as the guarantor of corporate profits, where tax dollars are used to replace sour business deals choking with 'bad paper.' While unemployment, foreclosures, homelessness, and repression evokes little more than a sneer, let the market feel failing stocks, or let banks stumble, and the deregulators come running to save their betters. Need loans? Need a bailout? Need a buyout? Nothing is too much for the well-to-do. And your money is necessary to protect them! This is socialism, with a wicked twist. --(c) '08 maj==================

For American newspapers, some that have been giants for generations, this is the age of Ragnarok. In Norse mythology, Ragnarok marked the destruction of the universe, when even the gods fell from their heaven. (Asgard).

For ages, newspapers have been the seedbeds of the information garden. Although seemingly threatened by the new technologies of radio and TV, this proved more appearance than actuality, for both mediums relied on the data uncovered by intrepid, although little-know newspaper reporters.

But we are now in the age of the Internet, a medium that only one newspaper (the Wall St. Journal) has successfully exploited.

That, added to lower circulation, and the flight of advertisers to the 'net, has spelled doom for newspapers.

In recent days, both the San Francisco Chronicle and the Philadelphia Inquirer have been forced to face the dilemma of bankruptcy.

Just a week ago, the Rocky Mountain News of Denver, Colorado closed its doors after a century and 1/2 of operation. As of Sept. 2006, the Rocky Mountain News had a reported circulation of over 250,000. But the key isn't circulation, it's advertising -- and advertising is fleeing.

Indeed, about 2 years ago, a media research firm executive said some papers didn't want bigger circulation -- they wanted a smaller, but more wealthy circulation base.

Colby Atwood, head of Borrell Associates, told a New York Times reporter that a "quality circulation" is more preferable "than quantity", and it was a "rational business decision" to "shed" the subscribers who cost more and generate less revenue." *

When newspapers intentionally "shed" some subscribers they are cutting their own throats in pursuit of fool's gold.

And although most articles don't mention it, I remain convinced that newspapers are dying for quite another reason. In a time of war, when readers needed their services most, many papers simply took a dive, and served the interests of power, rather than the needs of the people. Most papers sold the president's line because they feared that they would be seen as disloyal in wartime, and lose subscribers.

Instead, they lost readers anyway, because people couldn't believe what they read in black and white.

In fact, even before the Iraq war some news execs sent memos to their staffs warning them NOT to show wire photos of civilian casualties in the Afghanistan war. One memo told reporters to "play down" such stories.*